THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS FRIDAY, DECEMBER 14, 1934 PRESTIGE OF THE LEAGUE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXI, Issue 21983, 14 December 1934, Page 12

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS FRIDAY, DECEMBER 14, 1934 PRESTIGE OF THE LEAGUE

The session of the League Council has closed on a hopeful note. There is reason for it. A thorny problem occasioned the session; another, more thorny, called for anxious attention after business was begun. Not since the Sino-Japanese dispute and the trouble made by Germany over the alleged grievance of oppression in the matter of armaments has Geneva been so much perturbed as in recent weeks. First it was the Saar plebiscite, threatening to open an unbridgeable gulf between France and Germany. There was real cause for alarm. Should the worst happen, the League would suffer a grave setback, for the Saar was obviously a region in its special care and failure to do plain duty by it would be a bad blot on the scutcheon. The outlook brightened when the meeting of the Council was in prospect. A British decision to offer armed help in the emergency, this step being in strict accordance with League obligations, gave the Council its opportunity. Other disinterested Powers rallied in support. France and Germany were induced to countenance the project. The Council set it in motion. Thus the first crisis was met, and a danger was turned into an achievement. But Geneva had scarcely drawn breath after that anxiety when the quarrel between Yugoslavia and Hungary brought another and a more grievous fear. This threatened more than a bittjer conflict involving Balkan and Danubian States; by its raising of the question of treaty revision as one for immediate answer it seemed likely to split the League, and particularly to make the~'friendly co-operation of France and Italy impossible. Even a temporary ending of the concert of Europe, already losing cohesion, would have seriously damaged the League. All was black again, as black as could be. Even Mr. Anthony Eden, not easily daunted in his international service, had a moment of utter t dismay. However, possessing the full confidence of his Government, he held on in the face of the breaking storm. The storm gathered fury and passed. A mood of conciliation spread. Patient reason triumphed. The quarrel was ended. Although the echoes of the quarrel are not forever silenced, and its legacy of duty has yet to be fully taken up, there is reassuring proof that the League can do excellent work.

From this enhanced prestige of the League comes ap increased probability that the international co-operation for which it signally stands will proceed hopefully. There was sore need for this encouragement. Behind the two crises other menaces lurked, as was disturbingly apparent. To a large extent they remain. Great Powers are out of sympathy with the League's adventure. Japan's national programme has, for the time be;ng, bowed the League out of the Orient. The aloofness of the United States from its major task remains a cause of weakness. Germany's withdrawal has largely undone the work of the years since the Locarno agreement. There cannot be the slightest doubt that Germany, whatever the earlier justification for impatience with the League's slow progress toward general disarmament, intended to hurt the League by ceasing to cooperate—even as Russia long tried to hurt it with ridicule and scorn. The recent success at Geneva, the earlier! reception of Russia and Ecuador and Afghanistan into membership, and the steady pursuit of the League's less-spectacular purposes, cannot hide its need of a larger and surer hold on the world. It was founded with a prospect of universal membership and rapid accomplishment of a peace-ensuring mission. Neither objective has been reached. Instead of becoming a proud engine of peace it has often had to be content with the humbler status of a buffer—a very useful buffer, it is true, but still only a buffer. The plans of ,1919 have not been fulfilled. Geneva is not the capital of capitals it was meant to become. When all the bright story of its manifold work is recited, the disappointing fate of its chief endeavour must be noted with regret. To have done so well lately in the space of a few weeks is, therefore, all the more gratifying. Now comes Ihe question whether, from this point of vantage, it can go on, with desirable speed, to further achievement.

Signs of such progress are not altogether wanting. They come from the recent success. Of immediate importance is the news of closer understanding between France and Italy. They have refrained from meddling in the treaty-revision dispute, at a time when either of them might have taken occasion by the hand. Both have collaborated with Britain in averting trouble about that. This is a good omen, although of a negative sort. It is followed at once by the official announcement of an impending settlement of outstanding Franco-Italian, questions ; a declaration of friendship is to facilitate collaboration in European and African affairs. The former are related to the peace of all Europe;

the latter gather about a long and vigorous rivalry in territorial expansion, marked by cherished antagonisms of national policy and much jostling. A friendship removing these risks of conflict would be of real worth to the world. Another outcome of the recent Geneva experience is the moral pointed for Germany's consideration. If the League is now to get, as is hoped, a new lease of life, Germany simply cannot afford to keep out of it. Russia, seizing an opportunity, 'stepped into the League circle in Germany's absence, being accorded a permanent seat on the Council. The League, it is to be supposed, now goes on with renewed strength and confidence, despite Germany's withdrawal; then Germany has more to lose by remaining aloof, more to gain hy re-entry. Common sense dictates return and should find a way to that, whatever show of reluctance may be tactically assumed. In short, as nothing succeeds like success, the recent solving of the Saar and Balkan problems so adds to the prestige of the League to belong to it should be seen as good national policy, not to say international duty.